French President Emmanuel Macron. [Photo = Yonhap News}

The Presidential Office explained that French President Emmanuel Macron's visit to Korea marks the first state visit by a European leader since the current government's inauguration and the first visit by a French president in 11 years. 

The two leaders were scheduled to hold an official welcoming ceremony, summit, treaty and memorandum of understanding signing ceremony, and a state luncheon on April 3rd, and were expected to discuss cooperation in advanced industries such as AI, quantum, space, and nuclear energy, as well as regional and global issues. Judging by the announcement alone, it seems substantial. 

However, diplomacy is often revealed more by the itinerary than by press releases. It's not the number of days spent in the country that matters, but the formality of a state visit and the density of the actual time allocated. 

According to the schedule released by the Elysée Palace, President Macron's itinerary included a visit to Japan on April 1st, morning activities in Japan on April 2nd, travel to Korea on the afternoon of the same day, and his visit to Korea on April 3rd. 

The official public schedule in Korea was essentially concentrated on the welcoming ceremony, summit, signing ceremony, and luncheon on the 3rd. While formally a two-day schedule, the actual public movements show a structure where major events are handled and concluded the day after arrival. 

Compared to the statement "a state visit in 11 years," the timetable that the public can see is excessively light. 

What is even more stark is the contrast with Japan. 

The Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that following the summit between President Macron and the Japanese Prime Minister on April 1st, there was a signing ceremony for a joint statement, a joint press conference, and a working dinner. 

When comparing the official Japanese documents with the French itinerary, Japan's schedule included a summit, press conference, dinner, and morning activities the following day, while Korea's key events were from the afternoon of the 2nd until the luncheon on the 3rd. 

The issue is not whether Korea or Japan came first, but the noticeable difference in the depth of time allocated. 

France is by no means a country to be treated lightly in international diplomacy. France is a permanent member of the UN Security Council. The Presidential Office explicitly stated France's status as a permanent member of the Security Council during its briefing on this visit. 

When the leader of such a nation visits for the first time in 11 years, and the public schedule in Korea is effectively compressed into a welcoming ceremony, summit, and luncheon, it is natural for evaluations like "an itinerary embarrassing to call a state visit" to emerge. 

Compared to recent state visits by leaders of major countries, this schedule is thin. 

Furthermore, during the state visit of Vietnamese Party General Secretary To Lam, there was a summit, an exchange of cooperation documents, a joint press conference, a state banquet, and a friendly gathering at Sangchunjae the following day. The Presidential Office stated that the two leaders discussed matters for a total of six hours. 

During Brazilian President Lula's state visit, a state banquet was also separately publicized. 

Even though Prabowo's state visit as Indonesian President, on the surface of the public schedule, was centered around a luncheon, there was a separate friendly gathering at Nokjiwon in the afternoon of the same day. 

There is no rule that a state visit must end with a dinner. However, considering that recent cases have shown at least a certain depth of engagement after the luncheon, the Macron visit, within its currently disclosed scope, does not exhibit that depth. 

Of course, counterarguments are possible. One could say that diplomacy is about content rather than time. Even if the visit lasts only a day, discussing AI, nuclear energy, space, and advanced industries can be considered highly meaningful. This is true. 

However, if such important agendas are to be discussed, the question arises: why is the public schedule so brief? If the elevation of relations to a strategic level is proclaimed, yet the temporal design that demonstrates that strategy is absent, the rhetoric becomes hollow. 

Ultimately, there are two uncomfortable interpretations. 

One interpretation is that France allocated only that much time to Korea. 

The other interpretation is that Korea was satisfied with receiving the title of "state guest" but failed to secure the density of the itinerary and courtesies befitting that title. 

Based solely on the currently disclosed information, it is impossible to definitively conclude either interpretation. However, the outcome is clear. Japan had a working dinner and activities the following day, while Korea's engagement effectively concluded with a luncheon. This is the timetable that the public can visually confirm. 

Diplomacy is proven not by words but by time. However, this Macron visit's timetable lacks the weight of a state visit. Although the significance of a visit after 11 years was emphasized, the public is likely to see a compressed itinerary ending with a luncheon. 

Considering the standing of France, the visit seems meager, and considering the government's explanation of the "state guest" designation, it is even more embarrassing. 

There was the title of a state guest, but not the time of a state guest.